- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:30:40 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
RDFCore teleconference: 2003-09-26 Time: 10:00:00 Fri Sep 26 2003 in America/New York duration 60 minutes + possible 15 minute extension which is equivalent to 15:00:00 Fri Sep 26 2003 in Europe/London Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332 irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore danbri to chair. Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0245.html IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2003/09/26-rdfcore-irc Summary of decisions: to replace lBase material in semantics document with informative reference Summary of actions: JJC add nfc text to Concepts as proposed JJC review this document to take specific account of formal objection from I18N DanC review jjc's revised I18N document in the context of request for PR, looking for problems EricM review jeremy's document for inclusion in proposal to advance JJC draft proposal that whitespace processing is part of L2V map PatH update semantics document to replace lbase appendix with informative note and reference BWM link issue list to supporting documents (such as JJC I18N issue review) DanBri record Karsten's dissent in rdfs spec --swebscrape: date:20030926 -- 1: scribe Graham volunteered 2: Roll Call Present: Dave Beckett Brian McBride Graham Klyne Pat Hayes Dan Brickley Mike Dean Dan Connolly Jeremy Carroll Eric Miller Regrets: Jos de Roo Patrick Stickler Jan Grant Frank Manola 3: Review Agenda One additional item: request for rdf:RDF to be optional in more circumstances. cf. 4: Next telecon 3 October 2003 1000 Boston Time Chair? Volunteer Scribe [[[NOTE: the next-meeting data in the agenda was incorrect]]] [[[No chair or volunteer scribe noted for next week]]] 5: Minutes of 19 Sep 2003 telecon see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0213.html No objections. 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions 7: Confirm Status of Withdrawn Actions 8: Status of Misc Actions See current action list 2003-09-25, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0232.html [[[This was a somewhat rambling discussion, with the three agenda items run together, and the scribe had great difficulty following what was being discussed. What follows is probably incomplete]]] Brian noted that he will update the action list based on comments sent to the mailing list. Discussion of NFC action. (cf. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0234.html and following messages) ACTION: JJC add nfc text to Concepts as proposed Jeremy's text relating to I18N concerns to accompany request for PR: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/att-0259/i18n-part.html While we were talking, the following document was made public as a formal objection from I18N to our current design: http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2003/rdf ACTION: JJC review this document to take specific account of formal objection from I18N ACTION: DanC review jjc's revised I18N document in the context of request for PR, looking for problems ACTION: EricM review jeremy's document for inclusion in proposal to advance Whitespace processing for XML schema datatypes: Brian has had private discussions, and the short answer seems to be: "3" and " 3 " being different isn't going to be popular. But: if one asks is " 3 " in the lexical space of xsd:integer? Answer no. But ask if in the context of XML, is " 3 " an integer? Answer yes. Suggests preparing a proposal that whitespace processing is part of the L2V mapping of XML schema datatypes. ACTION: JJC draft proposal that whitespace processing is part of L2V map Eric working on securing a puiblication date for LC2. Not yet confirmed, but aiming for 10 Oct 2003. Action continues. Danbri working on text for abstract/status of document section Action continues. 9: defusing semantics objections (lbase appendix) Brian in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0242.html Two of Peter's objections concern the translation to LBase. I'm wondering whether we might defuse these objections by replacing the LBase appendix with a suitably worded informative reference to the LBase note. see also 'not accepteds' re semantics (pfps) summarised in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0241.html Proposed: we do just this from danbri, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0244.html RESOLVED: to replace lBase material in semantics document with informative reference ACTION: PatH update semantics document to replace lbase appendix with informative note and reference (ensuring that the revised wording suitably addresses the concerns raised, so that if there is an error in the lbase, such error doesn't contaminate the RDF semantics.) 10: collecting objections what exactly do we need to record w.r.t. known objections (esp I18N) prior to LC2? See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0237.html and nearby. Hopefully 2 of 5 semantics objections are addressed above. Concenring completeness of closure rules, they never have been complete and to make them so would be a major effort at this stage. ACTION: bwm link issue list to supporting documents (such as JJC I18N issue review) Concerning objection on schema, pfps-12 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-12 This was co-submitted by Karsten Tolle, who agrees the revised text is accurate but does not like the design choice it describes. ACTION: DanBri record Karsten's dissent in rdfs spec 11: next steps - planning for LC2 What needs to be done? - couch in terms of refining a 'request to advance' doc (old draft http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030331-advance.html) and removing obstacles such that we're happy to send it. What issues/comments do we need to respond to. Schedule? - update after SW CG discussion this week Discussion of issue tracking. Having separate LC issue list causes some problems, as it can result in duplication of existing decisions. [[[Outcome?]]] 12. AOB Request concerning optional <rdf:RDF> [[[Outcome?]]] swebscrape:N3:python: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/scripts/minutes2n3.py ------------ Graham Klyne GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Friday, 26 September 2003 13:48:15 UTC